The arrest of two of Sri Lanka’s most prominent human rights activists, Ruki Fernando and Father Praveen Mahesan, by the nation’s security forces last week was orchestrated to send a message.

Coming before this week’s United Nations Human Rights Council vote for an independent investigation of crimes against humanity during the finale of Sri Lanka’s civil war, the arrests were meant to show those alleging human rights abuses were, in fact, sympathisers of violent extremists.

Soon after the pair were detained, Sri Lanka’s government sent a diplomatic note to missions in Geneva, where the UN is in session, alleging the two men had been consorting with a hardcore ”terrorist” faction of the Tamil Tigers.
However, the arrests prompted outrage which forced the Sri Lankan government to release the men two days later, albeit with their phones and computers confiscated and on condition they did not talk to the media.

In the end, Sri Lanka sent an entirely different message than intended. That is, its government has an authoritarian bent, crushes dissent and remains in denial about the well-documented claims of human rights abuses.

The last months of the war between the government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Ealam, or Tamil Tigers, was savage. As many as 40,000 civilians died as Sri Lanka’s security forces routed its adversaries. Both sides have been accused of war crimes: the Tamil Tigers of recruiting child soldiers and using civilians as human shields, the Sri Lankan forces of deliberately shelling civilians herded into supposedly safe ”no fire zones” and of assassinating surrendering rebels.

After 26 years of brutal conflict, the international community had hopes for genuine reconciliation in Sri Lanka, a process that required all perpetrators of abuses to be brought to justice.

This would show that Sri Lanka was embarking on a new era where the rule of law was fair and unsparing and that all its citizens had a stake in the country’s future.

Sri Lanka’s government has failed in this task.

It’s Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission, which reported in November 2011, was a whitewash, run by a panel of former senior members of the government, including its attorney-general at the time of the conflict, who would have been directly implicated by any adverse findings.

There was no protection of witnesses and its only ”high priority” recommendation was to disarm the vanquished Tamil Tigers.

Compelling footage of abuses by its security forces appeared to be fabricated, it found. And, while there were four instances of possible human rights violations by its forces, the evidence was not conclusive and further investigation was needed.

Those investigations remain in abeyance, and a culture of impunity for the country’s security forces continues.
The 47 members of the UN’s Human Rights Council are due to vote on Thursday on the establishment of a comprehensive investigation by the Office of the UN Human Rights Commissioner into ”alleged serious violations and abuses of human rights” in Sri Lanka.

The US, Britain, Canada and the European Union are resolutely behind the inquiry, which will investigate combatants on all sides of the civil war. Australia has so far refused to back the resolution, despite the entreaties of its closest allies.

Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has not ruled out co-sponsoring the initiative but has given every indication that Australia will not do so without it being watered down.

This is an example of how the Abbott’s government ”stop the boats” diplomacy has undermined the values Australia has proudly and powerfully articulated on the world stage for decades.

Australia has forcibly returned more than 1000 asylum seekers to Sri Lanka in the past two years, and has given the
country two patrol boats to boost its anti-people smuggling capability.

The Abbott government has said it does not want the US resolution to ”isolate” the Sri Lankan government. It must also be nervous that the UN inquiry could show that Australia’s rapid return of Sri Lankan asylum seekers under the bipartisan ”enhanced screening” policy risks exposing them to continuing persecution, a breach of our international obligations.

But the Abbott government must look beyond any short-term complication of its relationship with Sri Lanka, or challenge to the credibility of its asylum seeker policy.

True reconciliation in Sri Lanka is ultimately the best method of stemming the tide of asylum seekers from the country.

The Abbott government is resisting a push by its closest allies to establish a United Nations investigation into war crimes and human rights abuses in Sri Lanka, where Australia has returned more than 1100 failed asylum seekers in the past 18 months.

A draft UN resolution, obtained by Fairfax Media, calls on the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to conduct the inquiry into ”alleged serious violations and abuses of human rights” in Sri Lanka that leaves open the possibility it could lead to prosecutions, including for members of the current government.

Foreign Minister Julie Bishop confirmed Australia had not co-sponsored the resolution and wanted a motion to reflect ”progress” in ”reconstruction and rehabilitation” in Sri Lanka.

Australia has previously co-sponsored resolutions at the UN’s Human Rights Council expressing concern on Sri Lanka’s record but is understood to have exasperated the US, Canada, Britain and the Europe Union by not yet backing this one, which for the first time calls for an independent and comprehensive inquiry into the allegations.

The end of Sri Lanka’s civil war in 2009 was brutal as the rebel Tamil Tigers were crushed by the Sinhalese majority government led by President Mahinda Rajapaksa, who remains the country’s leader.

Sri Lanka’s victorious security forces are accused of corralling civilians into no-fire zones and then launching artillery, assassinating surrendering rivals, and the rape and torture of civilians.

The Tamil Tigers are also accused of war crimes.

The UN inquiry, to be voted on next week, would investigate alleged atrocities by both sides.

Ms Bishop said the government wanted to see a final text of the resolution before deciding whether it would co-sponsor the resolution.

”Sri Lanka has made progress since the end of the violent civil war in 2009, including on reconstruction and rehabilitation and we expect this to be reflected in any final text,” she wrote in an email. ”We encourage all parties to take a constructive approach to assist the process of reconciliation in Sri Lanka.”

Any inquiry could place Australia’s policy of returning Sri Lankan asylum seekers in jeopardy. Returning asylum seekers to a country where there remains a genuine fear of persecution is illegal under international law.

Under a policy begun under the Rudd government, Sri Lankan asylum seekers are put through a stricter process to prove they are refugees, denying them access to legal advice and the right of appeal.

More than 1100 Sri Lankan asylum seekers have been returned, many forcibly, since October 2012 and that country’s government boasts it has stopped 4500 more leaving its shores, in part due to intelligence, materiel and financial support from Australia.